By Emma Emaize, Austin Ogwuda & Bulou Kosin
ASABA—DELTA State Governorship re-run election petition tribunal, will, July 25, decide between Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan of Peoples Democratic Party, PDP and Chief Great Ogboru of Democratic Peoples Party, DPP, who won the January 6 re-run election in the state.
The tribunal adjourned for judgment after counsel to parties adopted their written addresses and replies on points of law and urged it to dismiss and sustain the petitions, as the case may be.
Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, lead counsel to Governor Uduaghan, drew the tribunal’s attention to the July 20 judgment of the Federal High Court, Asaba, which held that Chief Ogboru was not validly nominated by his party for the re-run election he was challenging.
Citing a plethora of authorities, he contended that the petitioner has no locus standi to institute the action and prayed the tribunal to take judicial notice of the high court judgment.
Chief Mogbeyi Sagay, Ogboru’s lead counsel, contended that the high court judgment, which Uduaghan’s counsel had asked the court to rely on, was not pleaded and not before the tribunal, hence should not be relied upon by the tribunal in arriving at its judgment.
He argued that the judgment on the validity of Ogboru’s nomination for the re-run poll was inconclusive as an appeal and motion for stay of execution are pending on the matter to the knowledge of the respondents.
Counsel to PDP, Mr. Adebayo Adenipekun, aligned himself with the submission of Olanipekun that Ogboru was not a lawful candidate for the re-run poll, contending that the tribunal was wrongly constituted and disqualified from entertaining the petition.
Adenipekun further submitted that the relief sought by Ogboru was not grantable, adding that based on the materials presented before the tribunal, the petitioners had failed to prove their case.
He argued: “The case the petitioners pleaded was that the ballot papers were not stamped and signed. But they never produced a ballot paper that was not signed and stamped.”
Disclaimer
Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of Vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.